Saturday, February 28, 2009 3:28:03 PMOkay, so all we need to do is find a wormhole (even pluto way too far away to be reached by a human, so now think about the distance to a hypothetical phenomenon even rarer than stars) or make a wormhole (work out how to bend and alter the very fabric of reality in a controlled way).

suprise123, if I could hypothetically travel back in time, theory says that I wouldn't be able to alter the past as the past had already been determined by what I did when I was there, even if I did it before I was born. Perhaps someone needs to rephrase that in a way that makes more sense

And Dragonlord, though the evidence is strong enough for most strictly speaking black holes aren`t observable themselves, but their effects have been observed. Seeing as they`re just big empty patches from which no light leaves, it`s impossible to ever see one, but we can see that light does seem to curve presumably due to some really really heavy object. But we can`t prove that this is a singularity (i.e. black hole

Tuesday, February 24, 2009 11:07:19 PM"Science is observable, repeatable, measurable. There has never been any of these phenomenon observed [wormholes, black holes, stargates antimatter, and magic wands], let alone measured or repeated. So until someone actuall sees one, I continue to believe in the principles of Science."

Black holes (or at least objects that are exceedingly similar to the result that a theoretical singularity would produce) are observable, and have been for decades. Antimatter is also a well-known phenomena that has been measured both in labs and in the accretion discs of aforementioned black holes.

Wormholes are still hypothetical in that they are math based, and that the very few experiments done to give evidence to their existence, though those experiments have checked out.

Stargates are from a rather dull sci-fi series, and nobody claims that they are science. You're building a straw-man argument, and a poor one at that.